Page 25 - Summer2008

must be to assist nature in its struggle and to was mostly empirical, meaning based on experience rather than today’s
guide and intensify the healing power of nature. double-blind placebo testing. Although many considered the methods of
Furthermore, he realized that illness was never a bleeding and purging to be quite barbaric, Rush and his teachers believed
local process but a reaction involving the whole these methods to be the best and most helpful measures to cure sickness.
organism.” 23 Physicians such as Cullen and Rush could not understand how calomel
In contemporary terms, Sydenham’s phi- acted in the body, although its effects were plain enough. Medical historian
losophy would be considered “holistic” in his Harris Coulter intimates that they supported the use of calomel not for its
approach to symptomology, although his primary therapeutic bene ts, but because “they were reluctant to admit to ignorance
25
methods of treatment, particularly during the Bu- in any realm of medicine.”
bonic Plague, were calomel and bloodletting. De- Ultimately Rush would choose the same treatments he was taught
spite Rush’s admiration for Thomas Sydenham, (such as bloodletting, purging via calomel and other cathartics, blistering
Rush did not always agree with the Londoner’s and water) for every illness in the Colonies and later, the United States. He
methods. Sydenham cautioned against giving considered calomel to be the sine qua non for any and all ailments, prefer-
too much calomel even if the patient was not ring mineral medicines that were not “inert.” This philosophy would have
26
salivating, for “dysentery and death” might fol- a profound effect on the subsequent practice of medicine in America.
low. Rush, on the other hand, claimed that it was Rush graduated in 1768 and returned to America in 1769 after study-
not problematic if a patient did not salivate and ing brie y in London and Paris. He began his career working with the poor
that one could continue to administer the calomel of Philadelphia. He was a major proponent of smallpox inoculation and in
until salivation occurred. 24 the beginning, “his treatment relied more upon diet and drinks than on the
Pharmacology during Rush’s studies use of medicines.”
27

to the patients who receive them. Studies done in the United States show a direct correlation between the numbers
of amalgams placed by dentists with the amount of mercury excreted in the dentists’ urine. Likewise, dental hygienists
who place amalgam fillings without proper controls experience reduced fertility and more miscarriages and birth defects
compared to women not exposed to mercury in their workplace.
8
Why do some dentists and the American Dental Association (ADA) continue to stand by the use of amalgam fillings,
despite knowing about the potential and proven toxic effects? Probably because they accept annual royalty payments
9
from the very companies that manufacture them! Likewise, the potential for litigation is unimaginable if the ADA were
to admit that mercury amalgam fillings were toxic, in the same way that vaccine manufacturers do not want to take re-
sponsibility for vaccine injuries, and tobacco companies are being forced into trials for lying about the health effects of
cigarettes.
Currently about 52 percent of American dentists are mercury-free, having changed over to less toxic forms of
dental restoration. For many years dentists could not speak out against the dangers of amalgam fillings for fear of losing
10
11
their license to practice as a result of the gag rule imposed by the ADA and state dental boards in 1989. (The gag rule
has been struck down by several courts and overturned by Colorado’s state legislature.) As of January 1, 2008, Norway
became the first country to forbid completely the use of amalgam fillings, and Sweden followed suit on April 1, 2008.
Similar bans are under consideration in other European nations. Here in the United States Congressional Representatives
Diane Watson (D-California) and Dan Burton (R-Indiana) have twice introduced a bill to ban the use of amalgam fillings
in the United States, and twice the bill has been blocked by the ADA and FDA.
Many local WAPF chapters maintain lists of biological and holistic dentists who not only practice amalgam-free
dentistry but also know how to safely remove and dispose of amalgam fillings.

1. The ADA was actually formed as an organization principally to support the use of amalgam fillings.
2. archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/11/16/thermometer.ban.ap/index.html, accessed April 10, 2008.
3. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/30/MNGKT7EC461.DTL, accessed April 9, 2008.
4. http://www.lichtenberg.dk/mercury_vapour_in_the_oral_cavit.htm, accessed April 9, 2008.fdama/mercury300.htm.
5. Koral, Stephen. The Case against Amalgam Fillings, 4, 10, http://iaomt.org/articles/category_view.asp?intReleaseID=288&catid=30, accessed
January 16, 2008; see also http://www.lichtenberg.dk/mercury_vapour_in_the_oral_cavit.htm.
6. Ibid., 11.
7. Ibid., 2.
8. Ibid., 14. See Rowland, AS; et al. The Effect of Occupational Exposure to Mercury Vapour on the Fertility of Female Dental Assistants. Occupat
Environ Med., 51:28-34, 1994.
9. www.mercurypolicy.org/new/documents/watsonstatementnov5.pdf, accessed April 10, 2008.
10. http://www.iaomt.org/news/archive.asp?intReleaseID=230&month=5&year=2007, accessed April 10, 2008.
11. http://www.thewealthydentist.com/blog/?p=122, accessed April 10, 2008.

SUMMER 2008 Wise Traditions 23